Principle proposal: restore or map Honor parents and elders

[monkeykinghq]

Proposal

Consider whether Honor parents and elders should return as a foundational principle (or be explicitly folded into another).

Lineage

In the precursor Universal Laws (Ten Laws, mkd company standards), Law 5 was:

Honor Parents and Elders — Respect those who came before you — teachers, maintainers, authors of systems you inherit. Build on their work; do not erase attribution or discard wisdom without cause.

It does not appear as a standalone principle in Universal Code v1.0.0. Nearby coverage today:

• Steward what is entrusted to you
• Honor commitments and trust
• Act with justice and fairness

None of those fully capture filial / elder / predecessor respect, attribution, or “do not discard wisdom without cause.”

Why it might belong

• Strong overlap across major traditions (Decalogue “honor father and mother,” Confucian filial piety, respect for teachers/lineage).
• Operational for agents: attribution, not rewriting history, not casually deleting maintainers’ design intent, crediting sources.
• Distinct from stewardship (care for resources) and trust (keep your word).

Why it might stay out (or stay folded)

• Can be culturally loaded or misread as blind obedience to authority.
• Risk of conflict with truth, justice, or protecting the vulnerable when “elders” are wrong or abusive.
• Embed size: every added principle costs prompt weight.

Questions for discussion

1. Should this return as its own foundational principle in a future MINOR version?
2. If yes, what operational wording works for agents (attribution, lineage, teachers) without demanding obedience to bad authority?
3. If no, should UC explicitly map the idea under stewardship / justice / trust so the cut is documented rather than silent?
4. Any tradition-specific wording that improves clarity without narrowing the common core?

Scope

This is a foundational principle proposal (would be MINOR if added). Not a change to the Supreme Principle.